[Jack-Devel] questions about latency ranges

[Robin Gareus]

On 11/14/2017 11:50 PM, Markus Grabner wrote:
> 	Hi!
> 
> I have some questions about the minimum and maximum values of a port's latency 
> (i.e., its latency range). The documentation states the following:
> 
> "Both latencies might potentially have more than one value because there may 
> be multiple pathways to/from a given port and a terminal port."
> 
> Does this also apply to a setup with two output ports "A" and "B" 
> (representing two distinct physical devices) with different capture latency, 
> which are both connected to the same input port "C"?
> 
> Here are some details of an example setup (useful for demonstration purposes, 
> but probably not for doing any real recording work) as reported by jack_lsp:
> 
> "A" (Focusrite Saffire PRO 14 Firewire audio interface):
> firewire_pcm:00130e0402403491_1394/Out:01 (Mic/Lin/Inst:01)_in
>         port latency = 337 frames
>         port playback latency = [ 0 1792 ] frames
>         port capture latency = [ 337 337 ] frames
>         properties: output,physical,terminal,
> 
> "B" (Line6 PODxt Live guitar effects processor synchronized by zita-ajbridge):
> line6_in:capture_1
>         port latency = 867 frames
>         port playback latency = [ 1792 1792 ] frames
>         port capture latency = [ 867 867 ] frames
>         properties: output,physical,terminal,
> 
> "C" (Ardour track):
> ardour:track 1/audio_in 1
>         port latency = 0 frames
>         port playback latency = [ 1792 1792 ] frames
>         port capture latency = [ 867 867 ] frames
>         properties: input,
> 
> Under the assumption that the physical inputs of "A" and "B" represent the 
> same time scale, the correct answer for the port capture latency at port "C" 
> would be [ 337 867 ] and not [ 867 867 ].
> 
> So my questions are:
> *) What is the rationale behind jack reporting the larger of the two latencies 
> of "A" and "B" both as the minimum and maximum latency of "C", and ignoring 
> the smaller one?

In this case it's Ardour (not JACK) that sets the port latencies. I
guess you use Ardour5 which [wrongly] always reports the worst-case latency.

> *) Is it possible to provide additional information to jack to state that the 
> signals at "A" and "B" originate from the same physical source (or from 
> different physical sources sharing the same time scale), such that both 
> latencies of "A" and "B" are taken into account for the latency range of "C"?

I guess you use alsa_in or zita-aj2 for port "B", the latter tool has
options to set additional systemic latencies.

Just forcing the values to some different number won't help you.
You could add a jack-client in-between that delays the signal and sets
port-latencies to include the delay.
Or wait for Ardour6 which already does this, but but at this point in
time is still far from a release, and the session format is not stable)

ciao,
robin